The-Hogs.net - Washington Football Discussion, Redskins to Commanders Era

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

Deadskins wrote:

KazooSkinsFan wrote:This doesn't seem like a fair reply to Jock's point. I took his original point to mean he's not going to not play players because he doesn't like them, he'll play the ones who make the team better.

That wasn't his point at all. And I never said anything about not playing players because he doesn't like them. If you read the quote above, and through the other thread where we had a back and forth exchange, he talks about Mike playing players who give the Skins the best chance at winning each and every game, and gives no credence to evaluating talent. Someone brought up that specific point and the quote above was his rebuttal. He even went as far as saying anyone who thought otherwise was stupid. I know you'd love to find fault with my taking him to task for this one, but you are off base.

OK, fair enough. But then I don't understand why the examples were AH and Dockery. That's why I thought he was referring to guys Shannahan doesn't like. For future besides QB I'd be playing guys off our bench like our receivers, Jarmon, Barnes and Fred Davis.

I didn't give those examples. I figured Chief offered them up as examples of times Mike didn't play players that might have given us the best chance of winning a particular game. Here is kind of what I was talking about:

SkinsJock wrote:IF they're considering Grossman, I take it that they think he's giving them the better QB at this time and for this game
...

I don't think there's even a small chance that Grossman can show Mike that he's a better option at QB than a "healthy" McNabb

I'm sure that McNabb is our starting QB in 2011 and hopefully we'll have an NFL season

And after I said:

Deadskins wrote:Also, it's not unthinkable that once a season is out of reach that a coach might play other people than regular starters for evaluation purposes, to get them real game experience, or to rest an injured starter who might otherwise start if the team were still in the playoff hunt.

He comes back with:

SkinsJock wrote:I understand the thought about giving players an opportunity but I think also there is still the thought that the "opportunity" also gives the team a better chance to be successful - I just don't think a coach like Mike EVER just gives a player a shot - I think he's hoping that the player gives him a better chance at success - kind of the same thing but I just think that the ONLY thing that makes a guy like Mike happy is to win that game that day

Deadskins wrote:

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

Deadskins wrote:

KazooSkinsFan wrote:This doesn't seem like a fair reply to Jock's point. I took his original point to mean he's not going to not play players because he doesn't like them, he'll play the ones who make the team better.

That wasn't his point at all. And I never said anything about not playing players because he doesn't like them. If you read the quote above, and through the other thread where we had a back and forth exchange, he talks about Mike playing players who give the Skins the best chance at winning each and every game, and gives no credence to evaluating talent. Someone brought up that specific point and the quote above was his rebuttal. He even went as far as saying anyone who thought otherwise was stupid. I know you'd love to find fault with my taking him to task for this one, but you are off base.

OK, fair enough. But then I don't understand why the examples were AH and Dockery. That's why I thought he was referring to guys Shannahan doesn't like. For future besides QB I'd be playing guys off our bench like our receivers, Jarmon, Barnes and Fred Davis.

I didn't give those examples. I figured Chief offered them up as examples of times Mike didn't play players that might have given us the best chance of winning a particular game. Here is kind of what I was talking about:

SkinsJock wrote:IF they're considering Grossman, I take it that they think he's giving them the better QB at this time and for this game
...

I don't think there's even a small chance that Grossman can show Mike that he's a better option at QB than a "healthy" McNabb

I'm sure that McNabb is our starting QB in 2011 and hopefully we'll have an NFL season

And after I said:

Deadskins wrote:Also, it's not unthinkable that once a season is out of reach that a coach might play other people than regular starters for evaluation purposes, to get them real game experience, or to rest an injured starter who might otherwise start if the team were still in the playoff hunt.

He comes back with:

SkinsJock wrote:I understand the thought about giving players an opportunity but I think also there is still the thought that the "opportunity" also gives the team a better chance to be successful - I just don't think a coach like Mike EVER just gives a player a shot - I think he's hoping that the player gives him a better chance at success - kind of the same thing but I just think that the ONLY thing that makes a guy like Mike happy is to win that game that day

OK, that makes sense. Thanks for explaining. And from that, I agree with you, I do not think Grossman gives us the best chance to win or that Shanahan Sr. thinks so. My hypothesis is as I've mentioned a couple times is this is about Shanahan Jr. thinking Grossman is better then he is. I realize Sr. made the call, but I'm guessing it's because of what Jr. said and now that we're eliminated he just said OK, let's give it a go.

Just that the switch happens when we're eliminated seems like a pretty strong indicator that Mike knows McNabb gives us the best chance to win or this would have happened when we were still alive.

Bob 0119 wrote:Question; not saying it WILL happen, but what if Grossman actually does manage to pull out a win vs. The 'Pukes?

I mean, I know it's clearly not possible, but what if they somehow pull it off?

It might happen. He supposedly is a Kyle Shan guy so lets see. Just like Collins was for Saunders. It could happen. He could also look worse. If it happens then we know we at least have a solid back up. He didn't look so bad in preseason running our 2nd and third string against their 1rst string. Only one way to tell and that is what is going down this Sunday.

Bob 0119 wrote:Question; not saying it WILL happen, but what if Grossman actually does manage to pull out a win vs. The 'Pukes?

I mean, I know it's clearly not possible, but what if they somehow pull it off?

well... three things...
1: we'll all be standing, staring at our tv's for a day with our mouths agape, going "uuuuuuh... wow..."
2: Pukes fans will be shut up for another year.
3: About half of us (me included) will declare the season successful, pull up stakes, and wait for the draft.


No problem.

I understand the points made by both the "dead" man and by Kaz (and maybe others) - I still think that Mike thinks (OK - hopes) that we might be more successful with Grossman PLUS it's an opportunity to see what he's got

Grossman IMO is not as good as McNabb but we also might need to decide if we're going to hang onto him next year and Mike wants to look at him

I still think he's hoping this gives the team a better chance to pull this game out

I think we can win this game but IMO it will not be because of our offense or Grossman

SkinsJock wrote:I understand the points made by both the "dead" man and by Kaz (and maybe others) - I still think that Mike thinks (OK - hopes) that we might be more successful with Grossman PLUS it's an opportunity to see what he's got

Grossman IMO is not as good as McNabb but we also might need to decide if we're going to hang onto him next year and Mike wants to look at him

I still think he's hoping this gives the team a better chance to pull this game out

I think we can win this game but IMO it will not be because of our offense or Grossman

SJ, you are a far, far better man than I...

Deadskins wrote:That wasn't his point at all. And I never said anything about not playing players because he doesn't like them. If you read the quote above, and through the other thread where we had a back and forth exchange, he talks about Mike playing players who give the Skins the best chance at winning each and every game, and gives no credence to evaluating talent. Someone brought up that specific point and the quote above was his rebuttal. He even went as far as saying anyone who thought otherwise was stupid. I know you'd love to find fault with my taking him to task for this one, but you are off base.

regarding Mike playing players whom he felt gave him the best chance to win, I will point out that in this thread I did not imply that anyone that "anyone who thought otherwise was stupid" - that was about thinking it was a good thing to lose so that you might get a better draft pick - this just does not make sense to someone who hates to lose

I personally do not think that Grossman is a better QB than McNabb and I think that Mike feels the same - I now understand that he's evaluating Grossman but I don't think he thinks that necessarily hurts his chances of also winning this game - semantics, I'll agree

I just don't think that Mike is ONLY playing Grossman to get an evaluation, I think he also hopes he can help the team win the game - I don't think that Mike thinks Grossman is a game winner like McNabb but he wants to see how good a back-up he might be if needed next year - Grossman just needs to run the offense and not think that he needs to win the game - we won the first game because the stupid Cowboys made a lot of mistakes and we took advantage - we didn't play a lot better than they did we just took what they gave us

I'm still hoping that we can win this game AND if we can I think it will not be because of the offense or Grossman

SkinsJock wrote:

Deadskins wrote:That wasn't his point at all. And I never said anything about not playing players because he doesn't like them. If you read the quote above, and through the other thread where we had a back and forth exchange, he talks about Mike playing players who give the Skins the best chance at winning each and every game, and gives no credence to evaluating talent. Someone brought up that specific point and the quote above was his rebuttal. He even went as far as saying anyone who thought otherwise was stupid. I know you'd love to find fault with my taking him to task for this one, but you are off base.

regarding Mike playing players whom he felt gave him the best chance to win, I will point out that in this thread I did not imply that anyone that "anyone who thought otherwise was stupid" - that was about thinking it was a good thing to lose so that you might get a better draft pick - this just does not make sense to someone who hates to lose

I agree. I mispoke, and I apologize.

no worries JSPB - I'm still a little concerned about what is really happening at Redskins Park and am having a hard time rationalizing the choice to bring in Grossman
I still think (hope & pray) that Mike & Bruce want to get this franchise to be consistently competitive as quickly as possible

I understand that they want to find out as much as they can about the other 2 QBs but is what we're hearing really factual or "created" - Is it possible that Kyle and Mike don't think that this franchise will have McNabb as their starting QB here next year?

I will be very interested to see what happens if, as is expected by most, Grossman, and by extension Kyle's offense, have a really bad outing against DeMarcus Ware and company today - IMO this will be a huge mistake by Kyle if he really thought that Grossman could get it done against this defense and asked Mike to bench McNabb


I am just a very concerned Bruce Allen & Mike Shanahan supporter right now but we shall see

SkinsJock wrote:I understand the points made by both the "dead" man and by Kaz (and maybe others) - I still think that Mike thinks (OK - hopes) that we might be more successful with Grossman PLUS it's an opportunity to see what he's got

Grossman IMO is not as good as McNabb but we also might need to decide if we're going to hang onto him next year and Mike wants to look at him

I still think he's hoping this gives the team a better chance to pull this game out

I think we can win this game but IMO it will not be because of our offense or Grossman

He absolutely does think that Grossman gives us a better chance to win. Grossman did give us a better chance to win and played well. If Moss does not drop that 35 yard pass with only a safety to beat our second to last drive, we probably we the game. His last INT came when we could only throw something to the sidelines. Tough situation for anyone on that play.

SkinsJock wrote:no worries JSPB - I'm still a little concerned about what is really happening at Redskins Park and am having a hard time rationalizing the choice to bring in Grossman
I still think (hope & pray) that Mike & Bruce want to get this franchise to be consistently competitive as quickly as possible

I understand that they want to find out as much as they can about the other 2 QBs but is what we're hearing really factual or "created" - Is it possible that Kyle and Mike don't think that this franchise will have McNabb as their starting QB here next year?

I will be very interested to see what happens if, as is expected by most, Grossman, and by extension Kyle's offense, have a really bad outing against DeMarcus Ware and company today - IMO this will be a huge mistake by Kyle if he really thought that Grossman could get it done against this defense and asked Mike to bench McNabb


I am just a very concerned Bruce Allen & Mike Shanahan supporter right now but we shall see

Will you also be interested to see how that works in reverse?

What is your response to the whole situation, now that it has actually got the chance to play out?

I think that Grossman showed that he's possibly still good enough to be considered a viable back-up - we shall see

I'm not convinced that Grossman is a better starting QB option for us next year - he's not that good